Preaspiration in the Nordic Languages: Synchronic and Diachronic ...
Preaspiration in the Nordic Languages: Synchronic and Diachronic ... Preaspiration in the Nordic Languages: Synchronic and Diachronic ...
sense, preaspiration is linked more intimately with nasal voicelessness than with voicelessness in laterals and r-sounds. However, note that some dialects have preaspirated stops but no voiceless nasals. Also, unlike preaspiration, there does not seem to be a strong non-normative tendency for early voice offset in nasals preceding fortis stops in Scandinavia today. A basic premise in this discussion is the belief that phonetic changes have their roots in the pool of synchronic phonetic variation present in a language (Ohala 1989, 1993; Lindblom et al. 1995). Thus, it can be assumed that voiceless nasality was present, in some form, as a precondition for the development of the normatively voiceless nasals we now find in various Nordic dialects. It is suggested here that, in PN, the relative freedom of timing of voice offset and stop closure in the production of vowel + fortis stop sequences extended to stops following a nasal. 5.3 Where does preaspiration come from? In Chapter 2, section 2.3, it was stated that a normative trait is present for all members of the group of speakers under examination. Thus, when native speakers of Icelandic produce the word nótt ‘night,’ in a moderate tempo and in isolation, we expect to find, invariably and for all speakers, that the stop is preaspirated. Non-normative traits, however, count as constituent parts of phonetic variation. We do not expect that all speakers of Central Standard Swedish produce the word natt ‘night’ with a preaspirated stop, but, based on our experience of Swedish speakers, we expect that some will. For speakers of Swedish, the production of a vowel + stop sequence varies in a way that it does not for speakers of Icelandic. What is the source of this phonetic variation? For a given group of speakers, what decides the limits of the variation present in the production of a stop, an [s] or a back, close, rounded vowel? One delimiting factor may be the principle of adaptive dispersion (TAD) (Liljencrants & Lindblom 1972, Lindblom 1986). In this model, speech is produced in anthropophonic space. As the size of a phonological system, for example a vowel inventory, increases, TAD predicts that the proximity of the units within the system will also increase, but in such a way that sufficient contrast is preserved. As a consequence, the room for variability – 228 –
in the production of the units diminishes. In short, the more units that occupy anthropophonic space, the less freedom each unit has to vary. This model provides at least a partial account of the apparent distribution of vowels in the world’s languages. However, it is difficult to apply such a principle to a stop system. For one thing, the parameters of stop systems are more discrete in nature than those of vowel systems—there is no continuum between a bilabial and a dental stop, for example. Therefore, creating a measure of phonetic distance between stops is more difficult than for vowels. Also, as an effect of the size principle (Lindblom & Maddieson 1988), the addition of a manner or a place distinction in a stop system usually results in the addition to the system of a series of new units, rather than just one. Another factor that delimits phonetic variation is physiology. Speakers are bound to vary with regard to the size and shape of the larynx, pharynx and the oral and nasal cavities, tongue shape, denture, the innervation (and enervation) of muscles, as well as the control of all these structure at higher levels in the nervous system. These speaker-dependent differences have a substantial effect not only on the acoustic properties of the vocal tract, but also on the articulatory strategies employed by speakers. The latter is evident, for example, in the differences between the speech of males and females, which can be attributed to differences in the size of the articulators (Simpson 2001, Traunmüller 2001). With regard to preaspiration, differences in vocal fold size and physiology may play a role. Observations in the preaspiration literature are indicative of a sex/gender, as well as an age effect with regard to preaspiration production: Iversen (1913) remarked that preaspiration in the Norwegian Senja dialect was most noticeable in the speech of children; Fant et al. (1991) noted that female speakers of CSw tend to preaspirate more than do male speakers; Foulkes et al. (1999) found, for Tyneside English, that women and children tend to preaspirate, but that adult males do not; and Stölten (2002) found that women’s preaspirations are longer than men’s in Arjeplog Swedish. Hanson (1997) and Hanson & Chuang (1999) investigated the acoustic voice source characteristics of 21 male and 22 female speakers of American English. They found that, in general, females displayed a – 229 –
- Page 190 and 191: of this type as well. Remarkably, t
- Page 192 and 193: On the whole, the fortis vs. lenis
- Page 194 and 195: 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 120 100 80 60
- Page 196 and 197: Icelandic listeners, even though th
- Page 198 and 199: discussion of possible reasons for
- Page 200 and 201: Table 4-16. The findings of Indrið
- Page 202 and 203: these speakers will henceforth be r
- Page 204 and 205: lenes are often produced with a voi
- Page 206 and 207: Nasal + stop sequences in the Weste
- Page 208 and 209: inte ‘not’ without the final vo
- Page 210 and 211: ange for the remaining subjects is
- Page 212 and 213: For word-medial contexts data are a
- Page 214 and 215: instances may have preaspiration on
- Page 216 and 217: 4.6 Summary and conclusions The sur
- Page 218 and 219: that the ON word-initial lenes have
- Page 220 and 221: dialect in the Åland archipelago.
- Page 222 and 223: clear that ON m, n + p, t, k sequen
- Page 224 and 225: gradual process rather than a leap
- Page 226 and 227: stops that we find in, for example,
- Page 228 and 229: oth found in V()C syllables, but ar
- Page 230 and 231: Some Icelandic linguists seem to ha
- Page 232 and 233: On a quite different note, Liberman
- Page 234 and 235: dialect. With this in mind, Hansson
- Page 236 and 237: (1997:114f), Iceland, the Faroes, J
- Page 238 and 239: observed phonological distribution
- Page 242 and 243: higher degree of spectral tilt than
- Page 244 and 245: a failure to apply a process of per
- Page 246 and 247: similar to that in CSw today. Some
- Page 248 and 249: from t1 through t8, the productions
- Page 250 and 251: ation, voiceless nasality before fo
- Page 252 and 253: parameter such as VOT or F0, may th
- Page 254 and 255: identity and paralinguistic informa
- Page 256 and 257: —. 1974. “On the influence of N
- Page 258 and 259: Gillies, William. 1993. “Scottish
- Page 260 and 261: Johanson, Lars. 1998. “The histor
- Page 262 and 263: Lyttkens, Ivar Adolf & Fredrik Amad
- Page 264 and 265: —. 1995b. “Speaking rate, VOT a
- Page 266 and 267: Stölten, Katrin. 2002. Dialektalit
- Page 269: Department of Linguistics, Stockhol
<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> production of <strong>the</strong> units dim<strong>in</strong>ishes. In short, <strong>the</strong> more units that<br />
occupy anthropophonic space, <strong>the</strong> less freedom each unit has to vary.<br />
This model provides at least a partial account of <strong>the</strong> apparent distribution<br />
of vowels <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> world’s languages. However, it is difficult to apply such<br />
a pr<strong>in</strong>ciple to a stop system. For one th<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>the</strong> parameters of stop systems<br />
are more discrete <strong>in</strong> nature than those of vowel systems—<strong>the</strong>re is<br />
no cont<strong>in</strong>uum between a bilabial <strong>and</strong> a dental stop, for example. Therefore,<br />
creat<strong>in</strong>g a measure of phonetic distance between stops is more difficult<br />
than for vowels. Also, as an effect of <strong>the</strong> size pr<strong>in</strong>ciple (L<strong>in</strong>dblom &<br />
Maddieson 1988), <strong>the</strong> addition of a manner or a place dist<strong>in</strong>ction <strong>in</strong> a<br />
stop system usually results <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> addition to <strong>the</strong> system of a series of<br />
new units, ra<strong>the</strong>r than just one.<br />
Ano<strong>the</strong>r factor that delimits phonetic variation is physiology. Speakers<br />
are bound to vary with regard to <strong>the</strong> size <strong>and</strong> shape of <strong>the</strong> larynx,<br />
pharynx <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> oral <strong>and</strong> nasal cavities, tongue shape, denture, <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>nervation<br />
(<strong>and</strong> enervation) of muscles, as well as <strong>the</strong> control of all <strong>the</strong>se<br />
structure at higher levels <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> nervous system. These speaker-dependent<br />
differences have a substantial effect not only on <strong>the</strong> acoustic properties<br />
of <strong>the</strong> vocal tract, but also on <strong>the</strong> articulatory strategies employed by<br />
speakers. The latter is evident, for example, <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> differences between<br />
<strong>the</strong> speech of males <strong>and</strong> females, which can be attributed to differences<br />
<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> size of <strong>the</strong> articulators (Simpson 2001, Traunmüller 2001).<br />
With regard to preaspiration, differences <strong>in</strong> vocal fold size <strong>and</strong> physiology<br />
may play a role. Observations <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> preaspiration literature are<br />
<strong>in</strong>dicative of a sex/gender, as well as an age effect with regard to preaspiration<br />
production: Iversen (1913) remarked that preaspiration <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Norwegian<br />
Senja dialect was most noticeable <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> speech of children; Fant<br />
et al. (1991) noted that female speakers of CSw tend to preaspirate more<br />
than do male speakers; Foulkes et al. (1999) found, for Tyneside English,<br />
that women <strong>and</strong> children tend to preaspirate, but that adult males do not;<br />
<strong>and</strong> Stölten (2002) found that women’s preaspirations are longer than<br />
men’s <strong>in</strong> Arjeplog Swedish.<br />
Hanson (1997) <strong>and</strong> Hanson & Chuang (1999) <strong>in</strong>vestigated <strong>the</strong> acoustic<br />
voice source characteristics of 21 male <strong>and</strong> 22 female speakers of<br />
American English. They found that, <strong>in</strong> general, females displayed a<br />
– 229 –